A Sociological Interpretation of Drug Addiction - Essay Example

 SOCO-212-P Drug Addiction: A Sociological Interpretation Addiction is an issue that faces a great many individuals withinthe current world. However, there is no clear consensus with respect to the causes of addiction or what elements of addiction can be ameliorated in what ways. As such, one of the oldest debates that exist within the realm of psychology and psychological research is whether or not environment or heredity is the most determinant factor in helping to define and decide the way in which human individuality is evidenced (Kausar & Kiani, 2011). Although this debate has been raging for well over 150 years, advancements in psychology and psychological research have ultimately only added fuel to the fire and provided arguments for and against each approach (Verster et al., 2012). Within such an understanding and definition, the reader can come to an appreciable level of understanding that personal experience, gender, race, and socio-economics play a powerful role in determining the overall extent and level of exposure that a certain individual might have with respect to drug addiction (Elmeland, 2012). As a function of this level of realization, the following analysis will deal with addiction from both its hereditary standpoint as well as the social determinants/elements that factor into it. Further, a brief discussion and analysis of the contemporary theories can be attributed to such an approach will also be leveraged within the initial section of the discussion. It is the hope of this author that the reader can utilize this preceding discussion to gain a more informed and realistic interpretation/understanding of how addiction affects the lives of diverse groups of individuals. In terms of socioeconomics or gender, a theoretical interpretation of socioeconomic background and its impacts upon drug abuse and/or likely drug abuse is not new to the realm of sociological research. Instead, individuals such as Borland and Rudolph pointed to the relevant connection between socioeconomics and a high potential for illegal substance abuse as early as 1967 (Borland & Rudolph, 1975). Ultimately, the research that they performed, as well as a litany of others sense, was predicated upon the understanding that a relatively low level of socioeconomic status encouraged individuals to integrate with illicit substances due to the fact that they were utilized as a means of escaping very real material want (Frisher, 2010). Although stopping short of the Marxist paradigm, the research that was conducted by Borland and Rudolph helps to firmly engage the reader with an understanding of the fact is that socioeconomics continues to play a powerful role with respect to whether or not a particular action will be engaged and the overall degree of susceptibility that a certain strata of society is likely to face (Metlay, 2013). Likewise, gender and its impacts are understood as an outgrowth of acceptance and conflict; exhibiting a situation in which many times more men suffer from drug abuse/addiction as compared to women (Tomiţă, 2013). Further, in seeking to understand perhaps the most important element within a socioeconomic perspective of drug addiction and drug usage within society, the reader must focus heavily upon Marxist theory and the means through which the haves and the have-nots interact with one another and understand their respective societal roles. Whereas it is true the drug addiction and drug abuse has long been an outgrowth of depression, seeking to categorize this depression in terms of a broader sociological outlook, aided by the Marxist perspective, is perhaps the most relevant and useful of all approaches (Elmeland, 2013). As individuals feel themselves of or belonging to a second-rate status, the temptation of ameliorating this pain via drug abuse is maximized. Whereas the Marxist paradigm did not originally integrate with drug abuse and the evils of society that it gives rise to, it is nonetheless salient and useful to consider this particular perspective in terms of a response mechanism directed towards the inequality and unfairness that exists throughout society (Alaszewski, 2011). Yet, socioeconomics in and of itself is not sufficient with respect to seeking to understand the different social constraints and causal mechanisms that encourage certain members of society to integrate with illicit substances at some point in their lives. For instance, Sutker et al. (1978) pointed to the fact that the breakdown in the functionalist approach could ultimately coalesced into a situation in which tens of thousands of disaffected minorities realized that the dream of integration and assimilation was merely a pipe dream (Isorna et al., 2010). Accordingly, the research that was conducted by Sutker et al. (1978) drew specifically upon conflict theory as a means of debunking the failures that functionalism and its misinterpretation had affected upon so many minority communities throughout the United States. Whereas this particular piece of research was concentric upon the geographic area of the United States, the extrapolation it can be made is effective and useful with respect to understanding drug addiction and racial dynamics in a litany of other regions/nations (Ludwig, 2012). Moreover, from the research that was conducted, the reader can appropriately note that understanding drug addiction and race is not something that requires a rudimentary level of understanding of sociological theory. Instead, the authors of the piece in question noted that even though functionalist theory appropriately explained many of the behaviors that were exhibited within key demographics, conflict theory and others were more appropriate and defining the overall level of drug addiction/drug usage that were exhibited correspondingly (Hostetler & Ryabinin, 2012). As generation after generation of minorities struggle with addiction, the genetic/hereditary argument has come to fade into near obscurity. Instead, as psychologists, sociologists, and help researchers understand this reality to a greater and more diverse level, it is clear and apparent that drug addiction is not concentric upon a particular group of individuals based solely upon key genetic markers (Zimic & Jukic, 2012). Instead, what is likely evidenced is a situation in which entire demographics feel as if their contributions and overall worth to society has been extraordinarily limited; as such, the ability and subsequent desire to resist from coping mechanisms, up to and including drugs, is drastically reduced. First and foremost, what the reader should come away with as a result of the preceding analysis is an understanding of the fact that regardless of the genetic indicators that predispose an individual to a particular behavioral action, such an action is never guaranteed. Environmental and sociological continue to have a powerful and active role in determining whether or not these behavioral predispositions will ever be realized (Obembe, 2012). As such, seeking to put too much of an emphasis upon the genetic factors as a means of identifying whether or not an individual will act in a certain way can oftentimes yield incorrect results (Cruts et al., 2008). By very nature, humans seek to reduce each and every situation or issue to its least common denominator (Salarian et al., 2014). As science advances to delineate the means by which these genetic markers can impact upon the lives of the individuals in question, it will very likely be the case that a very broad range of genetic markers are at least partially responsible for some of the behaviors that are noted; however, that being said, the inherent danger then becomes living in a society or a medical community that seeks to diminish the role of personal choice and/or personal responsibility can play in determining behavior and actions (Murray, 2013). Finally, from the evidence that has been presented, the reader can gain an actionable understanding for the fact that psychological addiction is not only evidenced with respect to substance abuse; it can be evidenced in a number of other behaviors as well. Sadly, as long as these very real and prescient sociological explanations for drug use/drug abuse continue to be sidelined, society will likely suffer the long-term effects that they portend for a much longer period of time than might otherwise be realized. By seeking to understanding and define substance abuse in terms of genetic/physical addiction and psychological addiction, the researcher can come to understand the greater shades of meaning. References Alaszewski, A. (2011). Drugs, risk and society: Government, governance or governmentality?. Health, Risk & Society, 13(5), 389-396. doi:10.1080/13698575.2011.601579 Borland, B. L., & Rudolph, J. P. (1975). Relative effects of low socio-economic status, parental smoking and poor scholastic performance on smoking among high school students. Social Science & Medicine (1967), 9(1), 27-30. Cruts, G., Buster, M., Vicente, J., Deerenberg, I., & Van Laar, M. (2008). Estimating Effects of Drugs.Substance Use & Misuse, 43(5), 733-747. doi:10.1080/10826080701202643 Elmeland, K. (2013). Prevention research at the Centre for Alcohol and Drug Research. Drugs: Education, Prevention & Policy,20(6), 451-456. Ezard, N. (2012). Substance use among populations displaced by conflict: a literature review. Disasters, 36(3), 533-557. doi:10.1111/j.1467-7717.2011.01261.x Frisher, M. (2010). The science and politics of drugs. Addiction Research & Theory, 18(6), 609-611. doi:10.3109/16066359.2010.490001 Hostetler, C., & Ryabinin, A. (2012, November). Love and addiction: the devil is in the differences: a commentary on class and drugs. Psychopharmacology. pp. 27-29. doi:10.1007/s00213-012-2858-y. Isorna, M., Fernández-Ríos, L., & Souto, A. (2010). TREATMENT OF DRUG ADDICTION AND PSYCHOPATHOLOGY: A FIELD STUDY. European Journal Of Psychology Applied To Legal Context, 2(1), 3-18. Kausar, N., & Kiani, A. (2011). AN EMPIRICAL STUDY OF PREVALENT RATIO OF DRUG ADDICTION AMONG THE STUDENTS AT HIGHER SECONDARY LEVEL. International Journal Of Academic Research, 3(1), 645-651. Ludwig, E., (2012). Patterns of pre-treatment drug abuse, drug treatment history and characteristics of addicts in methadone maintenance treatment. Harm Reduction Journal, 9(1), 18-24. doi:10.1186/1477-7517-9-18. Metlay, G. (2013). Federalizing Medical Campaigns against Alcoholism and Drug Abuse. Milbank Quarterly, 91(1), 123-162. doi:10.1111/milq.12004 Murray, P. (2013). In Need of a Fix: Reforming Criminal Law in Light of a Contemporary Understanding of Drug Addiction. UCLA Law Review, 60(4), 1006-1044. Obembe, S. B. (2012). Practical skills and clinical management of alcoholism and drug addiction. Amsterdam Netherlands: Elsevier. Salarian Kaleji, Z., Amini, F., Shahnazari, M., Vahidi, S., Javadpour, S., Alizadeh, N., & Ghaderi, D. (2014). Determining the Role of Family Interaction Patterns and Tolerance in the Tendency to Drug-abuse. Advances In Environmental Biology, 8(1), 139-143. Sutker, P. B., Archer, R. P., & Allain, A. N. (1978). Drug abuse patterns, personality characteristics, and relationships with sex, race, and sensation seeking. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 46(6), 1374. Tomiţă, M. (2013). The Resilience of Women Drug Users Sentenced to the Executionof a Custodial Sentence. Social Work Review / Revista De Asistenta Sociala, (4), 95-106. Verster, J. C., Brady, K., Galanter, M., & Conrod, P. (2012). Drug abuse and addiction in medical illness: Causes, consequences and treatment. New York, NY US: Springer Science + Business Media. doi:10.1007/978-1-4614-3375-0. Zimić, J., & Jukić, V. (2012). Familial Risk Factors Favoring Drug Addiction Onset. Journal Of Psychoactive Drugs, 44(2), 173-185. doi:10.1080/02791072.2012.685408 Read More